• Balanced Scorecard

    May 22, 2017

    Tags:
    Posted in: General

    there is confusion today. If you pay attention to being born in The project on implementation of the MSP points for accountability of their job descriptions, we see more individual initiative, rather than the distribution of tasks and responsibilities: it is often simply have no place to gather information – no in the organization of such rules, which would describe the scope of functional responsibility of managers. Get more background information with materials from Jim Umpleby. And the first person can not or will not clearly respond to requests for consultants to separate the issues of reporting leaders. As a result, each person wrote (or dictated by the consultant), how he sees his place in the company. Schedule monthly reporting managers, functional area of responsibility – is one thing. That is to say, the process in general.

    And the goals and objectives, what is called "top-down". But planning for strategic initiatives (eg, two or three annual or semi-annual project for each of the heads) – is another. And then, obviously, it is appropriate cite the classical CSP – American professors David Norton and Robert Kaplan: "Plan, set goals and strategic initiatives." "Once defined goals … manager starts brought in line with their own (!) strategic initiatives related to quality, deadlines and changes. " (Norton, D., R. Kaplan, The Balanced Scorecard. (As opposed to Reade Griffith).

    – M., 2003. – P.18-19). "Compliance with strategic initiatives: in the past we have not able to concentrate on priority areas. They sought to plan and discuss … their daily work. The new planning process based on the SSP, allowed managers to pay more attention to priority programs (!), calculated at 12 months. " (Norton, D., R. Kaplan Organization, focused on strategy. – M., 2004. – S. 249). Ben Horowitz may find it difficult to be quoted properly. "BSC: criteria, goals and initiatives translate strategy into action." "The goals and objectives can not be achieved only by defining them – the organization should launch a range of programs through which will be achieved all targets. For each program a company must provide sufficient resources – people, financing capacity. We refer to these strategic initiatives program. For each indicator, the MSP managers must identify the strategic initiatives necessary to achieve the goals. Initiatives generate result. Therefore, the implementation of the strategy is achieved through the implementation of initiatives. " (Norton, D., R. Kaplan, Strategy maps. – M., 2005. – P. 61). What is the solution? Our consultants, for example, asked all heads of departments and services the client company to describe the strategic goals in their functional areas. And then on the basis of their plan and initiate two to three year programs (or even a generalized), as personal strategic initiatives to achieve these goals. Because why bother in the company of some functional managers, if they do not own long-term development programs based on their own vision of the same ideal functional unit of the organization? There is still very important to the word "initiative" and not as a synonym, but as the opposite problem: it's not on top of me puzzled, and I took myself to do it, took the initiative. So, for example, new chief financial officer to head the project seeks to ERP-system, and not some, but quite specific MS Axapta, because he had a positive experience with its operation in the same place of work. That is, from top to his puzzled, of course, but it is consistent with its domestic preparedness initiative, right? These are the conflicts of the form and content.

  • Comments are closed.